Slashdot Mirror


Volcano Near Mexico City Becomes More Active

benfrog writes "Popocatépetl, a volcano that sits 34 miles east of Mexico City, has begun a series of small eruptions. It's feared that larger eruptions would not only endanger people within range of its explosions, but disrupt life in Mexico City with ash clouds. 'People in the village of Xalitzintla said they were awakened by a window-rattling series of eruptions. Mexico’s National Disaster Prevention Center said one string of eruptions ended in the early morning, then the volcano started up again at 5:05 a.m., with at least 12 eruptions in two hours.' More than 30 million people live within sight of the volcano."

114 comments

  1. Well by masternerdguy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Must be all the tacos.

    --
    To offset political mods, replace Flamebait with Insightful.
    1. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      You're right! With all the talk about carbon dioxide we've been ignoring the consequences of methane pollution.

    2. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes. thats right. because he/she CONTROLS THE VOLCANO. you idiot.

    3. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or... They will start jumping the border just because there is a potential for danger. Now we have to accept them :-( Don't wanting them to die...

    4. Re:Well by Weatherlawyer · · Score: 1

      Scores 5? Funny? What century is this?

    5. Re:Well by virgnarus · · Score: 1

      Montezuma's Revenge.

  2. See, this is why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ...we need to move away from volcano-generated electricity, and decommission all volcanos near population centers immediately.

    1. Re:See, this is why... by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 4, Funny

      But I can keep my volcano based supervillain lair, right?

    2. Re:See, this is why... by mooingyak · · Score: 4, Funny

      ...we need to move away from volcano-generated electricity, and decommission all volcanos near population centers immediately.

      No no no. The problem is that we're using antiquated volcano design with inferior failsafes.

      --
      William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
    3. Re:See, this is why... by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Why? I have wondered if we do this right, if geo-thermal could pull the heat away to quiet down volcanos.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    4. Re:See, this is why... by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      Not a heat issue, it's a pressure issue. The fluid rock in the mantle squezes up into magma cavities underneath under the volcanos.

      Now, it's possible to have a solid rock cap on top of such a cavity, but that results in massive explosions of smoke and ash (see pictures of cone-type volcanos) rather than long flows of very fluid magma (see pictures of shield-type volcanos).

      Granted, it's been a couple decades since I covered any of this in a geography class, so I could be wrong.

    5. Re:See, this is why... by danbert8 · · Score: 1

      It has been awhile. I think you mean geology, not geography...

      --
      Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
    6. Re:See, this is why... by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      Nope. The class's name was geography. Once upon a time, they also taught some geology under those classes. That I remember.

    7. Re:See, this is why... by shiftless · · Score: 1

      Agreed. With a large enough containment field we could discharge the magma flow safely and carefully. Unfortunately, the technology to do this won't be invented for another 47 years.

  3. Earthquake link? by Sooner+Boomer · · Score: 5, Interesting
    There have been numerous large earthquakes along the Pacific coast just West of Mexico City in the past few weeks. I wonder if/how the two might be related?

    http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Maps/region/N_America.php

    Shows 4.3 and 5.1 in Central America in the past day...

    --
    Chaos maximizes locally around me.
    1. Re:Earthquake link? by DigiShaman · · Score: 2

      Most likely, yes given that it's part of the Ring of Fire if not near it. Disruptions just about anywhere along that area tends to cause a shake up (pun not intended) elsewhere shortly following a previous event.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:Earthquake link? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Informative

      There are always magnitude 2 - 6 earthquakes around the Pacific Rim - that's why it's called the 'ring of fire'. So yes, it's related, but pretty much business as usual.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:Earthquake link? by Weatherlawyer · · Score: 1
      http://groups.google.com/group/sci.geo.earthquakes/browse_frm/thread/beb08890a62405d6#

      A disclaimer: I don't believe it's plate tectonics.

      (Or lizards.)

    4. Re:Earthquake link? by T+Murphy · · Score: 1

      Searching for quakes magnitude 3.0 and above within 500 km of Mexico City since 2009, there is only one so far this year (there were 6 in 2009, 6 in 2010 and about 16 in 2011). As someone with no idea what I'm talking about, I wouldn't draw a link between recent earthquakes and the volcano.

  4. Of course, we all know the eruption date by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Funny

    December 21

    relax, 8 more months to go

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  5. Victory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I think the Zetas finally have a way to extort the district for protection money

  6. Here's a hint by koan · · Score: 4, Informative

    Go Google the location of the plates and fault lines, then look at earthquakes for the last 10 years and you will see a pattern.

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_ypalM7eSBEQ/SdzT_ajylVI/AAAAAAAAAbM/XNB1-z6lvKg/s1600-h/tectonic_map.jpg

    http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqarchives/year/byyear.php

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:Here's a hint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And other than plates moving, what pattern do you claim to see?

    2. Re:Here's a hint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me guess, it's Jesus?

    3. Re:Here's a hint by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1

      Jesus in a plate? Oh, Christ, it's already been done.

      --
      Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
    4. Re:Here's a hint by DerekLyons · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Go Google the location of the plates and fault lines, then look at earthquakes for the last 10 years and you will see a pattern.

      Not really, I see a bunch of earthquakes in random locations along fault lines. Show me a map for the 10 years before that, and then ten years before that, etc... and then we'll talk. Until then, all you have is pseudo-scientific bullshit.

    5. Re:Here's a hint by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      What pseudo-science? I I thought the parent was referring to the location patterns because of the known fault lines. That part is science. Now if we're talking about trying to assign order among chaotic events, then yes, that would be pseudo-scientific BS.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    6. Re:Here's a hint by cjjjer · · Score: 1

      How about Jesus in a plate of guacamole?

    7. Re:Here's a hint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because of Mexico city's location the possibility of an massive earthquake or eruption is likely sooner than later as the area is extremely seismically active, there is a ton of data on this if you're willing to Google it.
      As for "order among chaotic events" I think you could get an idea of where the next quake would be likely *IF* you have enough data points, and that means tons of sensors with GPS tracking plate movement and predicting stressors, however predicting the exact time of the quake would be difficult at best.

      In Iceland using GPS to monitor the bulging of a volcano there they were able to predict the eruption with fairly decent accuracy, they also used other factor like increase in out-gassing and increase in tremors in the area.

    8. Re:Here's a hint by philip.paradis · · Score: 1

      Before or after the guacamole is consumed?

      --
      Write failed: Broken pipe
    9. Re:Here's a hint by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Now if we're talking about trying to assign order among chaotic events, then yes, that would be pseudo-scientific BS.

      By taking a random 10 year period and trying to "find a pattern", that's what he was doing.

    10. Re:Here's a hint by shiftless · · Score: 1

      A major volcanic eruption in Mexico City would be quite unfortunate, for more than just the obvious reasons. It could throw Mexico into turmoil and set the stage for an attempted coup. Mexico City is presently one of the few safe places left in the country from the criminal gangs (drug lords and their organizations) who are vying for power.

  7. Need more virgins by PPH · · Score: 5, Funny

    Fast.

    Slashdotters, be afraid.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Need more virgins by DarkTempes · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nah, we're quite safe. We all know that only female virgins are sacrificed.

    2. Re:Need more virgins by couchslug · · Score: 2

      In other news, archaeologists have discovered an ancient Mayan textile depicting ritual sacrifice of "neckbeards" to placate the volcano god, Slashdopetl.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    3. Re:Need more virgins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Crap, that sucks! And not just because those are probably the only women that would accidentally date slashdot's many male virgins...

    4. Re:Need more virgins by PPH · · Score: 1

      What's the matter? You don't believe in LGBT volcano gods?

      Or GOP senators?

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    5. Re:Need more virgins by DarkTempes · · Score: 2

      Wouldn't it be female volcano gods that you would sacrifice the male virgins to?

      Or I guess gay volcano gods. But still, a volcano god that wants males is statistically more likely to be female than gay.
      Says so right in my volcano god almanac.

    6. Re:Need more virgins by PPH · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it be female volcano gods that you would sacrifice the male virgins to?

      I'm trying not to get the Slashdot communities hopes up.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    7. Re:Need more virgins by niktemadur · · Score: 1

      Nah, we're quite safe. We all know that only female virgins are sacrificed.

      As it turns out, not even a female virgin sacrifice is quite as effective as the right kind of adult:

      A man who would come here of his own free will.
      A man who has come here with the power of a king by representing the law.
      A man who would come here as a virgin.
      A man who has come here as a fool.

      Well fellow Slashdotters, two or three out of four ain't bad!

      --
      Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    8. Re:Need more virgins by necro81 · · Score: 1

      No, we just need to dupe some hypochondriac into thinking he has a terminal illness. Jumping into a volcano is a fine way to go out in style. Just keep Meg Ryan out of the picture, ok?

    9. Re:Need more virgins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would it make more mexican virgins flee to the southern parts of the united states giving more slashdot virgins a chance to have sex? But does sex with an illegal immigrant count? hmmm.......

  8. Oh, wait by Jetra · · Score: 1

    I got an idea, how about evacuating? I'm sorry, that was a smart idea. Stay there, I'm sure you'll be fine.

    1. Re:Oh, wait by tomhath · · Score: 1

      If that thing blows I'm sure most of the 30 million will evacuate something. And they'll need a change of underwear afterward.

    2. Re:Oh, wait by gmuslera · · Score: 2

      Probably would be a minor eruption, and Mexico City would be safe. But, to put it in another perspective, next time that are inusual activity in the Yellowstone caldera like the one 2 years ago, would you order to evacuate half of US?

    3. Re:Oh, wait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I got an idea, how about evacuating? I'm sorry, that was a smart idea. Stay there, I'm sure you'll be fine.

      "Harbingers of sorrow, natural disasters can be the cause of troubling and undesirable stress; And a volcano is no exception. But what should you do if a volcano erupts near you or your family?

      Here we see the Stevens family enjoying Sunday picnic. But suddenly, Daughter hears a noise.
      It's a volcano. Junior seems worried. But have no fear, junior, Jane learned in school what to do when you hear a volcano erupt.

      That's right, Jane. Duck and cover."

    4. Re:Oh, wait by Jetra · · Score: 0

      Reminds me of the old nuclear ICBM drills we did when I was younger. (I was born in 1990, so that should tell you how long we still did the damn drills. Get under your desk, the fifteen pounds of fake wood and stainless steel should protect you from the megatons of explosive power each nuke had including the sterilizing radiation should you survive the fire and shrapnel.)

    5. Re:Oh, wait by Jetra · · Score: 0

      Assuming that the 2012 prophecy holds true, evacuation would be deemed useless if the Yellowstone caldera blows. We'll have an entire year of winter after the shockwaves and flaming rocks destroy most of US's cities in the area.

  9. Under the Volcano by florescent_beige · · Score: 1

    I was going to type something about Malcolm Lowry but my fingers developed paralysis.

    --
    Equine Mammals Are Considerably Smaller
  10. Ash clounds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought they just called that "Tuesday" in Mexico City.

  11. Absolutely... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ...evacuate 30 million people. Plus all of Mexico City. Many of whom have limited resources.

    Oh... maybe you're not as smart as you think you are.

    1. Re:Absolutely... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      right. lets burn em to a crisp, add some hot volcano sauce and sell em as snacks on tortilla buns. much better idea!

    2. Re:Absolutely... by Jetra · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's called getting up and walking in the direction away from the volcano. Don't need a car, all you need is a great pair of legs. It's not brains, it common sense. I don't know why everyone needs a car to evacuate. "Oh look, a volcano is erupting. We have motorized transportation. Oh well, may as well sit here and accept fate."

    3. Re:Absolutely... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Let's assume your health is average. You can walk 2 miles per hour with just the clothes on your back. You might be able to do 20 miles of this on the first day. The 2nd day is blister day.

      Now let's throw in the posessions you might need or don't want to leave, like your silver coin collection that would get looted if you left it behind. Let's add grandma and grandpa. Don't forget the kids.

      Kiss your 2 miles per hour good-bye, even if you have a cart. Urban Mexicans probably don't have donkeys or carts. Now what do you do?

      Now, let's not forget that this thing smokes all the time. Not every eruption is particularly good. So now, every time it smokes a little you're taking a few weeks off from work, packing up the entire household and moving on foot for no good reason.

      Yeah, silly them for wanting to get on a bus or waiting until the last minute.

    4. Re:Absolutely... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      It's called getting up and walking in the direction away from the volcano. Don't need a car, all you need is a great pair of legs. It's not brains, it common sense.

      Well, you have one of the largest cities in the world, and its completely surrounded by mountains. Given the past history from the volcano, trying a mass evacuation on foot would probably kill more people than the likely number that would be killed by not evacuating (noting that you need to weight the number that would be killed in a more-significant eruption by the probability of such an eruption actually occurring.)

    5. Re:Absolutely... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love people like you, with no common sense yourself, no idea about weighing relative risk, no empathy for people who may not be exactly like you in health, resources, or obligations, blaming people for their plight when they have little control over their situations.

      It's like Ayn Rand meets Robert Heinlein.

      How *does* it feel to live with your head up your ass?

    6. Re:Absolutely... by Jetra · · Score: 0

      HAHAHAHA! To say I'm healthy would probably be a far cry from the truth. I have to fight with two older brothers and two cousins and my older brother's friend who, each of them, eat half a fridge to themselves. As for resources, I'm unemployed and the computer I got is worse than Windows 97 both in processing power and memory. I was not blaming anyone, I was just pointing out the obvious solution. As for having little control over their situation, what kind of talk is that? You always have control over your situation, unless your government is Communist or Socialist. The only thing stopping you is that you THINK you don't have any control. I hat Ayn Rand and I've never heard of Robert Heinlein.

      And I am the most empathic person of my family. My dad thinks we should bomb Iraq, my older brother, my aunt, and two of my cousin think we should cleanse America of N-words, including the person. I don't have my head up my ass because I actually care about people. I'm not one of those guys who posts stupid shit on Facebook like, "One in every six kids go hungry in America. Like and share this to get the word out to your friends and stop hunger." Yeah, I'm not going to like or share it. Instead, I'm going to my local grocer, grab as many cans of food, bags of ramen, and boxes of cereal and give it to a Food Bank. Look at that, I'm actually helping instead of saying that we should help.

      If we weren't so freaking tied to our precious internet, we would actually get stuff done, like when PSN was down for the month and a half and we killed bin Laden.

    7. Re:Absolutely... by Jetra · · Score: 1

      I meant to say President, not Person.

      What the heck is wrong with me all of a sudden?

  12. The important question by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    how to get all of the drug lords to put their base of operations on it? It could solve a lot of issues.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:The important question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, that'd clean things up in no time -rolling eyes-. Fix the demand side of the equation, and the supply side will fix itself. Unless:
      My name is Inigo Montoya, you killed my industry. Prepare to be forced to snort cocaine...

  13. Re:30 million by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First off, there are 100 million in Mexico. 30 million would be 1/3 of Mexico. Secondly, there are 12-30 million illegals, of which less than 75% are Mexicans (and if the is PEW's 12 million, then only 6 million are here - 50%).

    Sounds like you are letting your bigotry get the better of you.

  14. The Mayans were Right!!! by CanHasDIY · · Score: 0

    Sorry, but someone had to say it...

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  15. Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What kind of idiot builds a city next to a volcano?

    N from Edinburgh

    1. Re:Stupid by treeves · · Score: 1

      Dunno. Ask people in Tacoma, Olympia or Vancouver, WA or Portland, OR.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    2. Re:Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They had a good reason. See there was this bird on a cactus eating a snake.

      Can't argue with that.

    3. Re:Stupid by SgtAaron · · Score: 3, Informative

      What kind of idiot builds a city next to a volcano?

      For any of us that happen to live in the northwest US or the billion or so others who are near the Pacific ring of fire, we don't really have much choice. Here in Bend, we're only 30 miles from a bunch of old volcanoes--one of them, South Sister, is developing a bulge that grows about 1 inch a year--but if we moved the city farther away, we'd be out in the desert without our wonderful view of the Cascade Mountains and quick access to the ski resort and the dozens of lakes up there. Who would want that? I think it's a lot easier for someone from Scotland (I assume *that* Edinburgh) to avoid volcanoes in his native land, eh?

      In any case, lack of proximity does not equal safety. When Mt St Helens erupted in 1980, I was in Spokane, at least a couple of hundred miles away from it, and we got blanketed in ash that made life more difficult for weeks. We didn't suffer from pyroclastic flows or anything, of course, but it's not recommended to breath volcanic ash for any length of time (had to wear masks forever).

    4. Re:Stupid by Tastecicles · · Score: 1

      could be something to do with the unbelievably fertile soil that usually parks itself around the base of the cone?

      --
      Operation Guillotine is in effect.
    5. Re:Stupid by Tastecicles · · Score: 1

      yep, 'cos volcanic ash is very abrasive. Not to mention thixotropic when wet. Stuff turns to very dense mud at the merest sniff of moisture.

      --
      Operation Guillotine is in effect.
    6. Re:Stupid by gmhowell · · Score: 2

      Dunno. Ask people in Tacoma, Olympia or Vancouver, WA or Portland, OR.

      Ahh, hipsters. Got it.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    7. Re:Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Tacoma? Ha. I don't think so.

    8. Re:Stupid by quenda · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Woosh! Edinburgh castle is famously built on a volcanic crag. So the city is built on the remains of a volcano. Though one extinct for a few hundred million years.

    9. Re:Stupid by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Why kind of idiot builds on flood plains?

      What kind of idiot builds on the coast?

    10. Re:Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They had a good reason. See there was this bird on a cactus eating a snake.

      Can't argue with that.

      +10 Internets for you.

    11. Re:Stupid by niktemadur · · Score: 1

      Phrased in the form of a question, you correctly answered today's first Daily Double.

      --
      Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    12. Re:Stupid by Tastecicles · · Score: 1

      w00t!

      --
      Operation Guillotine is in effect.
    13. Re:Stupid by nanahuatzin · · Score: 1
      Not only near a volcano, but in the middle of a Lake., and in an earthquake prone place... and without a proper supply of drinking water. arghhh!

      According the tradition, after the Meshica (aztec) leave Aztlan, they wandered for two hundred years, seeking a signal sent by their god Huitzilopochtli: An eagle on the top of a Cactus. And finally they found it..

      In the middle of a lake, in a small Island.!!

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CodexMendoza01.jpg

      So, they built a great artificial Island around it.

      http://abrahimappel.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/tenochtitlan.jpg

      Now... the Texcoco lake is a system of Endorheic lakes.. which means, no only that the city suffered form periodic inundations, but that the water was a bit salty , so there was the problem of getting fresh water for the city. They built a system of dams to separate the water of the lake in salty and fresh water. and control the level of water.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Texcoco

      charming isn't it?

      After the conquest, the Spaniards dried the lake, son now... Mexico City suffers form lack of water

      Many Mexican Urbanists have confessed they have dream the travel to the past, with some stones at hand.. to sent that damn eagle to a better place.!!

    14. Re:Stupid by Thud457 · · Score: 1

      They had a good reason. See there was this bird on a cactus eating a snake.

      Can't argue with that.

      peyote's a helluva drug

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  16. the popo by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 2

    ...never seems to leave mexicans alone.

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  17. Re:30 million by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    75% of 30 million is what percentage of 100 million (here's a hint - it's 22.5%).

  18. Proposal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If their god wipes them out with a volcano, can we turn the country into the first "freestate" (http://freestateproject.org/)?

    JJ

  19. tags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who the zark tagged this 'globalwarming'? Volcanos don't need no stinkin globalwarming.

    1. Re:tags by Tastecicles · · Score: 1

      theory has it that without some major eruptions in recent prehistory the planet would be a large ball of ice. (source: BBC Horizon: Snowball Earth (2001)). Volcanoes emit huge quantities of, among other things, carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide. All major greenhouse gases.

      --
      Operation Guillotine is in effect.
  20. Ash and Mexico City by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 2

    disrupt life in Mexico City with ash clouds

    The air quality of Mexico City is very dirty, so dirty that birds actually die while they were flying and fall down from the sky

    And I read somewhere that an American diplomat once commented that the dust you see in Mexico City is mostly made up of dried manure

    In light of this, a little bit volcano ash won't do much harm to Mexico City

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:Ash and Mexico City by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats just pure bullshit. Not the manure you mention but the entire statement. Mexico city is no worse than any american city and compared to many it is as pure as spring water. Maybe you should actually visit a place before badmouthing it.

    2. Re:Ash and Mexico City by Coren22 · · Score: 3, Informative

      I wonder how many American cities you have been too. LA and Mexico City have the same issue, they are both built in a depression which traps the pollution, so they both have the same issue of a haze. New York however has very little in the way of air pollution, though I wouldn't want to swim in the rivers running through the city. :) Pollution issues in cities mostly has to do with geography, until we move from ICE, it is something we can't do too much about.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    3. Re:Ash and Mexico City by doston · · Score: 1

      until we move from ICE, it is something we can't do too much about.

      That's not really true. Smog has been redued by emission controls in California. If you'd lived in LA in the1970s, you'd know there's a lot that can be done about Smog. http://thegoodhuman.com/2012/03/04/smog-in-los-angeles. You couldn't see a mile back then...it was like living in a forest fire. Things can be done, but not with Republicans and climate change denying Teabaggers running things.

    4. Re:Ash and Mexico City by doston · · Score: 1

      Thats just pure bullshit. Not the manure you mention but the entire statement. Mexico city is no worse than any american city and compared to many it is as pure as spring water. Maybe you should actually visit a place before badmouthing it.

      Yeah? Did you do this in Mexico City? http://thegoodhuman.com/2012/03/04/smog-in-los-angeles/ I really don't think so. Mexico is fine and dandy, but I've seen what comes out of your tailpipes and it's unregulated, like any 3rd world country.

    5. Re:Ash and Mexico City by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Interestingly, Mexico doesn't have any emissions controls. Cars there aren't even sold with catalytic converters like cars here have been required to since the 70s. So if Mexico City has similar geography to LA, then Mexico City probably has pollution similar to LA in the 70s.

    6. Re:Ash and Mexico City by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what do you know about our cars? We do have emissions controls.

    7. Re:Ash and Mexico City by doston · · Score: 1

      Interestingly, Mexico doesn't have any emissions controls. Cars there aren't even sold with catalytic converters like cars here have been required to since the 70s. So if Mexico City has similar geography to LA, then Mexico City probably has pollution similar to LA in the 70s.

      That's ridiculous. Yeah, for any "small government" idiots (that would include people who think they're libertarian, are too uneducated to even know what the term really means, right-wingers, tea-baggers, and people who think they're conservative, but also don't really know what that actually means) who may be reading this; This is what you get when there's no government regulation or a government with regulation, but no enforcement power. That's pretty much a scandal of state capitalism. Had a feeling there was no emission control in Mexco, since there was a story recently (on npr or the wsj) about trucks coming up from Mexico with no safety inspections and no emission control. What can we expect form a narco war zone (that we caused btw).

    8. Re:Ash and Mexico City by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's worse: apparently, US taxpayers are paying to have these trucks fitted with catalytic converters:

      http://teamsternation.blogspot.com/2011/04/us-pays-to-put-catalytic-converters-on.html

  21. Seems to be business as usual by jbwolfe · · Score: 1
    ...for most citizens in Mexico City proper. Coincidentally I sit at this moment about 60 miles away from Popo, and selfishly I'm hoping it holds off blowing it's top for a few more hours at least until I can return home to the US. When I was assigned this trip a month ago I was worried about earthquakes and lack of oxygen. Now this...

    Uncharacteristically the weather is great and visibility today is spectacular. Could that be an omen?

    --
    Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?
  22. You insensible clod! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is slashdot, if the news doesn't deal with computers it will be used as a Monty Phyton tag line!

  23. Mayas training by omar_armas · · Score: 1

    The Mayas are training for Dec. 2012.

  24. Beans, beans, by bdabautcb · · Score: 1

    the musical fruit, The more you eat, the more you toot! The more you toot, the better you feel, so eat your beans with every meal!! -a song my mom used to sing to me as a child. I'll never forget it.

    --
    Koalas. They're telepathic. Plus, they control the weather. -Margaret
  25. call me volcano man by ozduo · · Score: 1

    now I have successfully tested my Volcanoanator!

    --
    I got to the chocolate box before you, that's why the hard ones have teeth marks.
  26. lol by shiftless · · Score: 1

    +1 I know, right...

  27. shoutout to all the GLP trolls! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Zetas did it!
    Damn space alien gangs with their space cocaine...

  28. Improvement in the last 20 years by gwolf · · Score: 1

    Well... As a Mexican living in Mexico City, I beg to differ. And have some first-hand information.

    Our air is not as clear and clean as it (c|sh)ould be, of course. But neither is the air of any ~20 million people city. Starting in 1989, very important programs to improve the air have been implemented. Some ideas –some bad, some good– were also scrapped in the process. The main points:

      The most polluting industries have been moved farther away from the city (or relocated to other places in the country)
      There is a mandatory emmissions control for all vehicles carried out twice a year for each car, strictly followed.
      As a result of the previous point: If your car is less than ten years old and has low enough emissions, no restrictions are placed on it. Older cars, or cars that don't meet the threshold, have to "sleep" one day a week, and one weekend a month.
      The biggest open-air dump yards and sewage systems have slowly been closed and converted. This is an ongoing process, and very hard to get right, but it is moving in the right direction.

    And yes, our city is still big and polluted — But when I've travelled to several South American countries, I have been astonished at how older cars leave a stench of bad combustion... That does not happen here any more. And that's indicative on why our air was in such a critical level 20 years ago.

    1. Re:Improvement in the last 20 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Word. The problem is the Mexican State that's next to the capital. That's where the shadows lie.

  29. Rush is Right! by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Fix the demand side of the equation, and the supply side will fix itself.

    If we just listened to Rush Limbaugh and locked up drug addicts like Rush Limbaugh, we wouldn't have any damn Zeta drug gang problem!
    errr wait, that would only clear up the big pharma drug gang problem, never mind...

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  30. Is there a caldera there? by MickLinux · · Score: 1

    Does anyone know, is there a caldera there? When I google it, I see that there was one formed 12k years ago, but if there was one today, then you'd want to watch for a supersonic outgassing, because if that happens, the city needs to evacuate ASAP.

    With the outgassing, my understanding is that the pressure reduces to one that is insufficient to hold up the ceiling of the caldera, so you then get a collapse, and a mega-explosion, a la Santarini, Krakatoa, and other such megavolcanos.

    --
    Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
  31. Any live web cam by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

    Any live web cam broadcast of this event?

    --
    Jack of all trades,master of none
  32. Check the surroundings first by gwolf · · Score: 1

    I live in Mexico City. The Popocatepetl is a very well known and well studied volcano. And no, although it's 35Km away from the city's South Eastern outskirts, Mexico City is by far not at risk. The eruption –in case it happens– would most likely not be a violent one (i.e. as with St. Helen or with Chichonal). This volcano has been passively active for thousands of years. Volcanic activity did increase, yes, but it happens every few years — I'm not sure if it was in 2000 or 2004, but we even saw some lava being spilled out of the crater. Of course, that washed away the glaciar that had been in place for hundreds of years (at the very least).

    Oh, and while our country's security situation is VERY far from "quiet" (specially in the last five years where the current president has taken all the wrong decisions), the country is by far not in the face of a civil war or an uprising. The criminal groups that –yes– have created panic in many areas of the country are not after the political control. The violence is linked with the routes for drug transit to the USA, but those groups do not (openly) seek political power. And, even with our elections drawing near (July 1st), it's very far from a real threat nowadays.

  33. Wow... by gwolf · · Score: 1

    I have less imagination for distressed, poor people than you do. The setting you pictured us would belong in my imagination to a post-earthquake Haiti — and quite probably I'm being too discriminatory anway. Yes, I live in Mexico City. A city known for people having to cross 40Km in 2hr to get to work (because there's so much people and so many cars that traffic is just so slow downtown).

    We so far have had nothing we have not seen over and over for the last hundreds of years. It's not gratuitous that this volcano is named "Popocatépetl" — The smoking mountain. It always has some smoke getting out. We are just seeing an increase in its strength, as we are used to, in ~10 year cycles.

    Nothing to worry about.

  34. Re:30 million by donscarletti · · Score: 1

    So Mexicans cannot legally immigrate?

    --
    When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
  35. Re:30 million by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    some do that, most don't